Our opinions are based on our knowledge and experience, which tend to change when our knowledge and experience change.
Nothing new really, nothing strange—it’s how it works. And I suppose we shouldn’t get too nervous about it.
However, with written material, like an article, a book, a letter, or an email, it becomes very obvious. Confrontational. “Hard copy” learns us that opinions are not something static, but rather temporal and fluid. And above all, we learn that they contain relative truth. Circumstantial truth.
Still, I do think it’s important to ventilate opinions. Doing so, others are able to improve our knowledge, thereby making our opinions more “grounded.” By taking into account criticism, approval, negations, and new or overlooked facts, our opinions can become more substantiated.
When it comes to this, the Internet boasts a global, inter-human, inter-cultural, and inter-social communications system which enables mankind to build more valid and better opinions.
Nevertheless, alongside more (scientific) facts, more data, and “better” opinions, there’s a whole lot of pseudo-knowledge, unfounded material, and plain rubbish to be found equally.
Sometimes it’s not that easy to differentiate nowadays, and to pick out the good, valuable, and valid stuff. It needs a steadfast critical and discerning mind to do so.
If you follow my drift, you’ll understand that this essay is opinionated also, holding opinions which are eligible to change somewhere and somehow in the future. And me saying that, is of course… another opinion too.
But more important, when we understand deeply that all is opinion, we can perhaps finally become free of them.